Ed said that all commercially-made mayo is completely safe. “It doesn’t even have to be refrigerated. No harm in refrigerating it, but it’s not really necessary.” He explained that the pH in mayonnaise is set at a point that bacteria could not survive in that environment. He then talked about the summer picnic, with the bowl of potato salad sitting on the table, and how everyone blames the mayonnaise when someone gets sick. Ed says that, when food poisoning is reported, the first thing the officials look for is when the ‘victim’ last ate ONIONS and where those onions came from (in the potato salad?). Ed says it’s not the mayonnaise (as long as it’s not homemade mayo) that spoils in the outdoors. It’s probably the ONIONS, and if not the onions, it’s the POTATOES. He explained onions are a huge magnet for bacteria, especially uncooked onions. You should never plan to keep a portion of a sliced onion.. He says it’s not even safe if you put it in a zip-lock bag and put it in your refrigerator. It’s already contaminated enough just by being cut open and out for a bit, that it can be a danger to you (and doubly watch out for those onions you put in your hotdogs at the baseball park!). Ed says if you take the leftover onion and cook it like crazy you’ll probably be okay, but if you slice that leftover onion and put on your sandwich, you’re asking for trouble. Both the onions and the moist potato in a potato salad, will attract and grow bacteria faster than any commercial mayonnaise will even begin to break down. Also, dogs should never eat onions. Their stomachs cannot metabolize onions. Please remember it is dangerous to cut an onion and try to use it to cook the next day, it becomes highly poisonous for even a single night and creates toxic bacteria which may cause adverse stomach infections because of excess bile secretions and even food poisoning.
Good-by king in welcoming going nuts as being the new normal. What happen to all of those people in the occupy the crowd? Why no protests of loosing one of your food groups then? After all! Using all of those drugs, the munches’ set in. Your thoughts may be. A supper big candy bar is the pick me up of choice, that you need! No thoughts on loosing your choice in eating one of those big boys then? No protests?
The latest out of the candy world, is the king size candy bar is gone! That’s right! You as a potential consumer, will no longer have a choice in buying that big boy. It is all about controlling the addict, or about how much sugar people are eating. So the Mars candy corporation is down sizing all their candy bars. The regular sized bar is about 280 calories now. But they plan to down size them to 250 calories soon. But the big boy, king of the king size will have to go the way of the dinosaur. Call it democratic evolution.
The constant evolving thoughts of controlling governments, have only accomplished to turn adult people into crying toddlers at best. Assuming the roll of parenting to mandated popular choice. You know the kind of choices? “You can choose any color you wish to have as long as its black!” was the choices offered when Ford first marketed his cars. Along with the governments know-it-all attitude of..”YOU SHOULDN”T HAVE TO MAKE A CHOICE OR LIVE WITH THE RESULTS OF MAKING CHOICES!” The reasoning is “candy and eating too much of it, leads to diabetes.” Governments popular thought is… “people can’t control themself’s in only eating some of the big boy candy bars.” Displaying their own know-it-all knowledge of knowing better. They clams “it’s for your health.” This is why we need smaller candy bars. Are we then going to alow those of small-mindedness, but over inflated self-worth, along with wrongly opinionated over barring government, creat these official food czar’s? Who will just run our lives to a point. It will be great! Right? After all making choices shouldn’t be one of your simpletons tasks to do at anyway, or at any time in your lives. Yes Your choices may affect you and only you. But the government knows best. So making a choice for yourself with regards to candy and sugar is just going to be controlled for you. Or so the over inflated thought proses goes down that slippery slope dragging you with it.
Just what is next? The candy police at the nearest 7-11, checking your sugar levels, and marking the test results on your sugar card. You know the one? The one next to the driver’s licence issued by the same people. If you go past your daily limit of sugar, they will issue a ticket. Just think of it as when you are receiving this kind of ticket of course. Just as a reminder to slow down your speeding on the highway to diabetes. It is all about the policemen / sugar-police keeping you and others safe, right? The revenue from ticketing people will just subsidize health care anyway…. Right?
Smaller candy bars in the market place, along with uncontrolled or under self-controlled individuals buying them doesn’t make a healthier environment or market place. These kind of consumers will only be forced to eat more than one bar. I suppose one could then make the argument. That opening more than one bar is getting an increase in exercise.
If company’s just alow themself’s to be bullied by government like this with a false sence of doing good for their consumer. Then they deserve the consumer to pack it all in and stop buying their products. Never to go back to them again. After all, if just a smaller candy bar is the wizards of wisdom solution, for people eating too much sugar in their diets. Then ban candy bars out right! Totally! At least then you would have some street cred, as a community leader of health.
Let’s face it people. The unintended consequences of government meddling with your choices, isn’t doing anything for your health. But rather it is what takes your ability to control your life from you. With smaller candy bars it sounds good. But is it? What’s stopping you the consumer from buying 2, or 3, or 4, or mass more of the candy bars, then stuffing them into your face to get your candy fix. Someone could reason that you’re getting a weeks worth. What is missing from the view of government in seeing all of the empty but smaller candy bar wrappers around you. Government isn’t seeing the true picture of their adult toddlers they have created. Nor do they see “You” as their toddler stuffing your face with sugar by the spoon full straight from the bag with the biggest serving spoon you can find? Just serving up the sugar fix to the addiction. If one is an addict to sugar, binge eating candy bars will not be controlled with smaller candy bars. Then what is accomplished, in all of this?
Down sizing King candy bar doesn’t do anything for your health personally. But it does become more expensive to buy smaller candy bars for getting your candy fix. less product ( AKA SUGAR! ) at a higher cost to you the consumer. This produces a higher tax revenue for the government as well. If it was only for health reasons? Then we would BAN IT ! Thoughts are, down sizing the candy bars will have a health impact to the population, or so at least the reasoning goes. If it doesn’t? We then have to have the sugar police! These are the loose ideas swimming around the toilet bowl of the liberal democrat’s mindset. Which then assumes it to be a win, win! Creating by forcing good / better health is win one! The sugar police is an unintended job produced by controlling sugar for public safety. Win two!
What makes this candy company’s collapse to governmental control, even more suicidal to its self. Is if this was all about health? Then they can be viewed as destroyers of health by the government then. The liability in a legal sense, along with manipulations of such company’s by the government, for the false sence of health, will actually drive them to bankruptcy or legal hell.
Because our parents, in this case ( the government ) knows best! It couldn’t be their lack of willingness to control candy makers on our behalf can it? NO! The governments excuse is ” We made them make the bars smaller. “So people couldn’t be held to have any responsibility’s for themself’s? Or should we?
Who’s health is it anyway? Shouldn’t the ones whose health it is have also the burden of responsibility and cost for it? If someone can handle the cost of destroying their health without the help of the government, or its involvement in such destruction. Then the cost of fixing it should be theirs as well.
If you have become half crazed with allowing the government to control every aspect of life, then you shouldn’t have any complaint when you get short-changed with your expectations. Don’t complain about the vegetables that will certainly be forced down your throat! Because of some misguided conception that they can prevent cancer, and do so cheaper than synthetic drugs. Also cutting the cost to the government health care system.
Don’t complain when you find yourself in McDonald’s ordering the supper size fries, with a big-mack, and shake. When your eyes pop out of your head viewing the burger. Its new size will resemble a 50 cent piece, supper size fries will only be one fry about 4 inches long, and your shake will be served in a 2 ounce size. All for the sake of reducing heart disease / diabetes in your life. Oh Yea! I all most forgot, That will be $10.50 please!
If government controls everything in your life, they will certainly be able to take control of everything for you in life. Society may rethink its position. We in society are not needing any present help in deferring the cost for destroying health, we then certainly don’t need the governmental help in paying the cost of restoring health once destroyed! In other words. ” TAKE SOME RESPONCBILITY”S! ”
There is no need of wrapping ourself’s up with a false sense of victimhood, using flawed ideology of the liberal government. Who says ” We will do it all for you! ” As being the toilet bowl mentality, that we refuse to flush.
The attitudes of winners are “ I have been endowed by my creator with the right to pursue happiness. Which is determined by my life’s goals, and choices, being able to make choices for myself is what makes one an adult and liven free! In the aftermath of such choices we are also happier / happier adults.”
If you need a stress reliever? Enjoy-em while you have them. Other wise say. “Good-by king! Welcome going nuts! “
Mars Reduces Candy Bar Sizes and Promotes “Responsible Snacking” http://www.delish.com/food/recalls-reviews/mars-reduces-candy-bar-sizes-clone-1329747220?src=soc_twtr via @delishcom
All the best.
That’s right ” Who’s health is it anyway?” The daily news is full of some stories that have plenty to do with our health, but who’s behind the scenes, and why? Who’s concern is it if I choose to eat… what ever it is, that now is to be found to be less than healthy? Remember back in the day when there were plenty of stories on ” Coffee” and the health risks it presented to our body’s needs. That was then backed up with some stories on how coffee was found to be healthy to drink within moderation. Then the new stories of how it can cause cancer / cure cancer…..! Are you just as frustrated with the stories yet, confused, or just tuning out to all the chatter out there on health, and some new government studies on what is means to be healthy now? If your like me at this point, just pour your self a big mug of coffee and get amused at all of the conflicting news on any new health fad out there. What is good one day will most certainly be bad the next day. In short they ( who ever they really are ) really don’t know any thing about it!
If you’re trying to be healthy then fine, I see why you may have an interest about such studies. You have to excepted some facts, that your gean’s, the ones your ancestor’s gave you, may then play an even bigger part in the health equation. It may not only be how much we eat or of what we eat, or not eat at all. Just saying something like “smoking is bad” isn’t going to be the end all to any assumption made. To say you may have a higher degree of health problems “when you smoke”, would be more accurate. There is always a Gorge Burns in the mix. The one person or some group of people, who have been doing what ever is deemed to be “un-healthy” for the moment, as a daily practice, and have no real negative affect on them. Doesn’t make it healthy or unhealthy. But that’s the exception, not the rule.
For governments to get involved with some regulation of some product or substances. On the false premise that they must do this for the best health possible. Is just a wrong way of going about helping people. Why regulate the use of something with a future possible negative result? How about telling people what they now must do for some future positive result, concentrating on some positive activity’s rather than focusing on some negative ones? almost every thing that is good for you, can also be a substances, or action that will affect you negatively if used in excess.
Example: Some people who have been blessed with having reached the mile stone of living passed 100 years young, almost all ways are asked, “What they think is the secret to long life?” More times than not, they say something like, ” Having a shot of alcohol, moderation in everything and good gens.” But there is plenty of studies about alcohol and the negative affect of it on the body. Who is right? Some young wiper snapper who says it is bad, or some old person who seem to say what a big fool you are with every second that ticket by on the clock.
Life is to be enjoyed, not lived in fear of what is going to destroy some aspect of it.
So it seem like more of a bet in the casino of life with every choice we have to make when it comes down to what to do with health. If left to government to do everything for us then. We will certainly get over regulated by government. People who only call for governments to get involved are just people with weak dispositions, lacking the willful abilities to choose and live, with having made a choice in the first place. They only wish to have some guarantee to some likeable out come, or some fulfillment of their fanatics they create in their minds as how things should be. Funny when these people are faced with a somewhat different outcome. They wish to change the whole outcome thing, or at least cast blame on someone or something as their reasoning, in deal with this new unlikable thing in their lives.
There is a story going around right now that some people would like the government to get involved in regulating ” SUGAR!” Yes they sight that sugar is a menace to society as a health destroyer. They point out that it is also additive to people who tend to use to much of it. They also sight the added cost to society as a negative and the biggest reason as why governments need to regulate it. Are these people for real? Did they forget about the other substances out there in the food chang that are also addictive? How about everyone’s taste buds? We all train them. Like it or not we control or trained to our own likes and dislikes, no matter who their owner may be ( The individual person). We all train our taste buds to our determination as what tastes good. So yes! Food can be just additive. So lets face it! It is dangerous to everyone who isn’t getting it or understanding these simple truths. How about drink? Drunk driving is killing thousands of people every year. It could be regulated even more! Right?
Yet we live with too much regulations from government already. Some of these regulations are costing people’s lives. Even when they are being promoted as being concerned government, looking out for you. How about the government regulating minimum gas mileage ratings for cars and trucks. For the automotive industries to achieve these limits they have cut down on the weight of steel used in each cars, and trucks. How many people are killed do to lower speed accidents that are also fatal to the occupants of these kind of cars. The regulation by governments are then not always the best solution to any problems out there. Nor do these governments doing anything for the good of its people and their health or safety, just because. It is a degree of money and control then, to these issues, rather than what is found to be healthiest for everyone.
When it is involves governments, it always comes down to money, and control. He who controls the money also has the control. Money all on its own breeds corruption uncontrolled. So this is why regulation never works to anyone advantage. The outcome is always an out of control government.
It is not wrong to study sugar and it’s effects on the human body, both short-term and long-term. But leaving it up to each and everyone to decide for themself’s as what to do for themself’s and how much to use of it. The truth is, to realize the dangers of sugar as possibly causing or interdicting hypertension, Insulin resistance, High triglycerides, Diabetes, and liver problems that also mimic the effects of alcohol and or alcoholism. These can all be contributed to some kind of sugar abuse or self-abuse through and by the using of sugar to an excessive amount.
If we are only going to use sugar as the whipping boy to one of the biggest health problems out there. Then we are making an incomplete assumption to the dangers to good health. What about Obesity? There is an obesity problem in this country, also an important and serious health issue as well. To signal out just one issue or to just label a signal food, or just one ingredient in that food, is to overlooking to a greater degree the health issues as a whole problem to good health. Picking only on one issue by the government or by some over active activism group. Which through intense lobbying of the government hopes to change the lives for everyone is short-sighted. It’s accomplishments then only will confuse the issues, and therefore adds to the problems. No to mention the unintended consequences. Remember the studies on coffee already mentioned. Some who were dangerous and then some who were great. Conflicting information at best. Resulting in total confusion.
To legislate human behaviors is impossible! It is impossible to legislate against stupidity, as well all forms of behaviors like compulsiveness, irresponsibility, and even impulsiveness, all of these traits are involved in the individuals choices that they choose for themself’s in everything. Successful control through intervention, by some legislature, is the first ingredient in failure. Every government that has tried it in the past has failed in the long run. For it is always met with resistance by all of those who are affected by it. Why not let nature take its course? Let nature regulate people who by their own choices, choose badly within their own lives, like diets, smoking, or whether they on their own will exercise regularly or not! The consequences good or bad from all of our choices are the price of living free and enjoying freedom. If we enjoy some sugar along the way, should we or anyone have to pay the price through taxes or over regulation for the sweetness of it? Who’s health is it anyway?
If it is only about the health cost to government or individuals, as the argument to regulating….( just pick something to be regulating ). Are you not then just removing the chef incentive for changing behaviours. Governments charge more taxes on cigarets, the overall outcome is reduces usage of the products. But when it comes to health no one has the responsibility’s of their choices, because of insurance paying the bills. If people were more directly affected by their choices and knew there was not to be a bailout of some sorts for their poor choices. They may then choose differently for themself’s. Instead of destroying what health they were given by abusive behaviours, or their self-imposed abusive habits. Who’s responsible for the health they would have at any time in life? Who’s health is it anyway?
Just some cute references ….http://t.co/6hPzpfhy
All the best!
Most creatures along with humans are made of 70% water, so drinking water is natural.
The European union has new regulations regarding water and the drinking of it. Drinking water shouldn’t be such a troubling thing so as to have a governmental agency to become over involved in the regulation of it’s uses, saying: ” There is no proof ( Scientific or other wise ) that the drinking of water from bottles helps to re-hydrate in cases of dehydration.”
Why is this governmental agency getting overly involved in the acts of drinking water in the first place? Why should they have to set the amount of daily water consumption a person should have in order to pursue good working bodily functions and good health?
You know just when your body needs water, being thirsty is the body’s way of telling your mind ” Get some water man! It’s been too long of time sence my last drink! ” I don’t think people who are thirsty need someone to tell them to drink water. If your stuck in the desert and come upon some water, you would brush aside the scum on the top and drink it down. The human body can survive days without food but only a day or two without water before problems set in. Low water in the body’s system is dehydration. Symptoms of dehydration are, headache, low blood pressure, light handedness, difficulty of urination, or discoloured dark urine. Just to name a few of the biggies.
If you’re heading towards becoming dehydrated your body will be telling you just what to do. All though some illnesses can cause you in becoming thirsty like( diabetes ) for one, over active people in warm weather can also become more in need of water thus more thirsty, over normal conditions. That’s the point of our body’s telling us just what it needs and when it is needed.
Yet in the European union, water has become a major issue of late. The need of regulation of their bottle water company’s, and their advertisements of the product they sell, seem to be the problem. Companies that claim ” Drinking water will aid in, or even cure dehydration, or aid in the rehydration in cases of dehydration”. Can not be permitted. This can result in a two-year prison sentence now with the new regulations, and laws! Just crazy when you think about it. But having to contemplate just such madness, is a sure cause of your next headache!
I have heard of, and witnessed government’s micro management of every kind of things before. But personal water consumption? Considering that we all are made of 70% water, as far as living things go at least. Most modern people just drink too much diuretics! I can see that most people can have some sort of dehydration going at any time. Drinking too much diuretics like soda, beer, alcohol, coffee, and tea just to name a few of the majors. Most people are leaving out the drinking of water because it tastes like …. nothing! This can lead someone down the road to mild dehydration!
Why can’t water bottlers say that ” Drinking water can help with or even cure mild dehydration “? It’s water! Having to get an approval, or a government involved as if it is a drug, is just ….? Should governments get involved with this in the first place? Just what is the harm in these claims by water company’s? It’s not making false statements. Maybe incomplete statements? Only because dehydration can have many causes, like being caused by illnesses. But when you go to the hospital being dehydrated, an Iv solution hook up, is the call by most doctors. The solution is mostly water!
When you consider that EFSA ( The European food safety agency ) wasted 3 years of time to draw their conclusions as well as this ridiculous regulations of bottled water. We who choose to live in the reality of life, should come to question their sanity. As well as the need for them to have totally waste the tax payers money.
The EFSA defends their ruling by saying ” Water doesn’t reduce the risk of dehydration. But to alow clams, and or advertisements by the water company’s who bottle water, is only trying to imply that there is something special about bottled water. this kind of mind-set is not a responsable claim to making. “Yet this same agency along with the UK’s Nutritional Society, who also agrees with the study findings of the EFSA.
These agencies also say ” That in order to have a balanced diet and promote good body functions and all a round good health. It is necessary to drink 2 leaders of water daily.”
Funny! How it is important to set standard dosages of the amount of water one should drink. without taking in consideration of the age of a person or their size, sex, or the activity’s of these individuals. Without also excepting the clams that water is a requirement for all living things in avoiding dehydration, or that the drinking of water for the purpose of re-hydration of ones self is a good thing.
What should the governments point be, by having great details about the use of water, and its proper dosages for people through immense broad generalizations, as being the standers of the day? Yet overlooking the facts of its necessity in order to avoid dehydration, as well as allowing the bottle water company’s in making this claim?
If we as people of a modern society allow our governments to take over every aspect of life, through a socialization type of government taking over totally. We will be greatly disappointed with an over reaching power grabbing attitude. We could then easily get to a point of outlawing common sense! Is this the new normal?
Don’t be fooled by a government who’s only excuse is to try to explain the easily explainable, in an overly difficult and overly complicated way! Someone tried to defend governments way of complicating everything or so it seems by saying to me : ” Government and the job of governing people is like making sausages. Everyone likes to eat them but doesn’t like to see what goes in them!”
I say ; ” Governments attitudes, like making the posses of governing with legendary insane micro management of every aspect of our lives. By the over use of overly complex posses, designed only to confuse the people they govern. Through the unrealistic regulations, as well as new laws, only leads people in having less freedoms! To freely exchange the responsibility’s that are ours in the first place. In except a life of ease, presented by a government-run by totally intoxicated politicians, with the ultimate drug of total power over you. Is the total avocation of ones own freedoms! Leaving you no other choices other than excepting their views, as well as their choices made for you in everything. This amounts to the same amount of freedoms as the government feeding you a excrement sandwich, with the only real concern of making you ask if it is okay to wash the bad taste out of your mouth with a little water!
Did I hear you say please?
Reference : @Telegraph EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration http://tgr.ph/u32dnG
All the best!
“Well I’m having my tonsils out.” He answered softly.
“Man you have it made! You will get ice cream and jello for about a week while you recover. I had that done so I know!” He then went back to his play.
“Thanks for that good news. I will have something to look forward too.” He to returned to his play.
The two played for some time and seemed to get along well. sharing their toys and just getting along in general. The moms were keeping an eye out on the two but let them play for the time being.
The boy who was going to have his tonsils out taped the other boy on his leg. ” Hay! What are you in here for?” He said softly with a small smile.
“Well .” He paused to gather some thoughts. ” How should I say this? I’m getting circumcised!
“Oh. Sorry man!”
“Just what do you mean…. Sorry man?”
“Well I don’t mean to scare you but I had that done when I was born.”
” And? How was it? I told you! That you would be getting ice-cream and jello, and that’s a fact man! But you didn’t say what it was like for me, since you have had it done? Come on tell me please!”
“Sorry man, I did get circumcised, when I was first-born. Recovery is not as good as ice-cream and jello…..It was rough though, real rough, It took all of my first year till I could walk again!
All the best!
Should Obama care be forced on us? Like forcing fat people to get on weight watchers!
The unconstitutional state of Obama care is being fought out in court and more likely is heading for the Supreme Court soon for final augment.
What is wrong with Obama care? It is not just the cost of it, but the forcing of Americans to have it, or buy healthcare insurance! That is the argument that is said to be unconstitutional! Over stepping the power of government upon the limiting of power of the document we called the constitution! If these immoral politicians who are hell-bent on trampling this document succeed, then just where will their power grab be stopped?
Their reasoning could then be that (fat or obese people) and (made up by whose guide lines?) would cost the government more money for their health care. Could the government then force fat / obese people to get on weight watchers? Could it then be said “it is in the best interest for our society”? So it takes away someone’s own responsibilities in making their own choices for themselfs… Right?
Should the government be involved in, picking a winner among Private Company’s like weight watchers over Jenny crag lets say, but still forcing someone against ones own will to get healthy, and at their own cost, by governments mandate? Much like Obama care does now, it mandates having to buy insurance and at the coverage’s that they see fit for you. Or will it be at random like saying so to speak, just what places you can go out for dinner on the town? Could it be said that parents that feed their kids only fast foods, are abusing them? By forcing high calorie foods down their throats?Is a over weight kid a true signal of parents who do not care? So the whole country is FAT!! But is that the place for governments to get involved in our personal lives?
Freedom is making ones own choices along with accepting the responsibilities that go with that choice. No mater if they are good, or bad, or indifferent, to the one who is choosing them personally.
A government that controls the individual’s abilities of making choices, as well forcing the cost on to our backs is by definition “TYRANNY”!
How far from true freedom have we come, when first It was fought for?
The fastest way for government to get people to change their habits is for the people to bear the cost of their choices. Take the cigarets taxes, also known as sin tax! The cost of cigarets keep going up and the result of that added coast creates less smokers! Insurance is just a socialistic way of price control, that at its end only controls the competition in the free markets. Thus driving cost up!
Health insurance should only be (for those who choose to get it) much like a catastrophic health insurance police. According to their choices, as to what fits their needs. At least it would be by their own choices, as to what they would buy in the free market place? All other health services, like routine checkups, should be up to the free markets and the competitions between the providers of them. Paying out-of-pocket by individuals themself’s.
Some say government already forces people to buy car insurance! Is that right? I say they don’t force me to buy a car yet, nor do they force me to buy life insurance either, nor will they force me to go to weight watchers! Whats next? Telling us / you, “These are the foods that you must eat, just these certain foods / drinks”?
Its time government leads by example rather than by decree! First step for the leadership,if they would like to give us something new, like Obama care, then they should to come to a place of excepting what is good for the people is also good for them as well. They should accept it first! Obama care I’m saying! No different deals in retirement plans or health plans for government! It is a government of the people by the people for the people. We have 530 or so kings /queens of government with rules for themselves, and different rules for we the people. In short , we are going down the slippery slope towards “TYRANNY”!!
Free markets that are manipulated by government’s immoral policies have only a Pandora’s Box full of effects, of unforeseen consequences in them! Yet before, when government has just cracked the lid to peek inside, they came up with more of the same solutions to the old problems. As to what it was leading them to peeking into Pandora’s Box to start with …? Clearly they are kids, that when looking at a button they think to themself’s “That looks so attractive to push”! Just like kids they reason “what will happen if…”! They can not keep them selves from pushing it. When pushed, all hell breaks out! With unforseen consequences they do not like! Their solutions are, run for the cover of higher taxes, or bigger government programs! Hiding from the reality as well as refusing in excepting the problems that they created! They only offer us a solution by saying to us, ” We are faced with real big problems, and no other solution will do! We must do this for your own good!” But if they are the uncontrolled kids pushing buttons without knowing better, or knowing the outcomes, or results from pushing the buttons in the first place! Then…..!!!
How about not doing the same old failed policy’s of socialism?
I have a simpler solution for government: “A STRAIGHT JACKET”!
Do we the people really want government to open( Pandora’s Box )all the way?
all the best.